Specific Works Supervision

Hutt News, Volume 12, Issue 38, 15 March 1939, Page 5

Specific Works Supervision

NOTICE OF MOTION DEFEATED

At the Borough Council meeting on Monday night, in pursuance of his notice of motion "That all specific works of £500 and over be carried out under the supervision of the, works committee," Cr. H. V. Horlor referred particularly to the work which was being carried out on the Recreation Ground, of erecting towers, the widening of the main street, and many other classes of work which he argued should be entirely under the direction of the works committee. Cr. Ashton seconded the motion and contended that such .jobs were essentially engineering jobs. Cr. A. Marshall, a member of the reserves committee, vigorously opposed the motion and said that if such a motion were carried he would seriously consider his position on the Council. If his committee had sufficient expert advice they were quite competent to carry out the work entrusted to them. They were there as representatives of the ratepayers, who had not elected them to any particular committee, and he would not at any time allow any councillor to take away any office with which he had been invested. Mr. Andrews pointed out that such a suggestion as the motion intended was unnecessary, as all the councillors had . the closest cooperation of the council's officers. Where the work entailed the expert knowledge of the engineer or the Superintendent of Reserves, such assistance was freely given, and there was no necessity for interference. Cr. Hall supported the resolution on the ground of certain technical knowledge being required. Mr. Andrews pointed out that the engineer or the Superintendent of Reserves were each called in to advise in their respective capacities. Cr. Morrison thought that street wideining should come under the direction of the works committee, and instanced the irregularity of the verandahs on the new shops. Cr. Gregory opposed the motion, and suggested that if the two committees co-operated they would overcome all difficulties. Cr. Mitchell opposed the motion, and did not see any ncessity for a change. Mr. Andrews said that in all I'' experience he had never known the reserves committee to fall down on its job. He was certain that no change of control would achieve better results. Cr. Hay said that there were experts on all the committees, and so long as they had the co-operation of the experts one committee was just as competent as another to carry out the work. . The Mayor referred to the town clerk for his interpretation of the wording of the motion, and he was of the opinion that if there was a job of £700 to be carried out in Riddiford Park, under Cr. Horlor's motion this would have to be carried out by the works committee, also tree planting. Cr. Horlor disagreed wiui the mayor's ruling, and was asked to resume his seat. On being put, the motion was lost by 5 to 4, Crs. Horlor, Hall, Morrison and Asliton voting for the motion.